
C7S 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 789 108 6 



pH8^ 



E 673 
.C75 
Copy 1 



America. Germany. Ymt^, 
The Administration \ia^d?f,?ted, 



SPEECH 



OF -—V. 



\y' 



ROSCOE CONKLING, 



OF" ]SrE^V\r YOKK, 



DBLITERED { 



IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED STATES, 



f 
FEBRUARY 19, 1872. 



« Let aU tbe enda thon alm'st at 1»« thy Country's." 



WASHINGTON: /^^^ash.^^ 

P. & J. RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, 

EEPORTERS AND PBINTERS OF THE DEBATES Off CONQBKSS. 
1872. 



/ 






i 



America- Germany. France The Adminislralion Vindicated 



On tbe 12th of February. 1372, Mr. Svmnbe. of 
Massachusetts, ofiFcred a long preamble charging the 
authorities of the United States with violating neu- 
trality toward Prussia in the late Franco-German 
war by selling arms to France. The preamble also 
charged American officials with corruption. 

A resolution followed raising a special committee 
to inquire into all the charges, and also into other 
matters nottouchingtheGovernment or officials, but 
relating to the mercantile affairs of American citi- 
Eens. 

No objection wa« mnde to an immediate vote on 
the motion, but Mr. Sumnbe asked delay. 

On the 14th day of February, Mr. Somnbr asked 
to put aside all other business and take up his mo- 
tion. This was promptly voted, and an immediate 
investigation was offered by the Republican Sen- 
atorB. A vote was noi permitted, but Mr. Sumnkr, 
and afterward Mr. Schurz, delivered elaborate 
speeches reiterating and enlarging the charges, and 
reading newspaper and other uiatements to prove 
them in advance. 

On the 19th of February- 
Mr. CONKLINGBaid: 

Mr. PuesidlENt: Nearly five months of thia 
session have gone — March, April, December, 
January, have gone, and nearly the whole of 
February. Legislation waits, and debate goes 
on, only for political effect. The appropriation 
bills are put aside. They ought to be acted on 
now, while they may be deliberately sifted and 
freed from errors which will escape us in the 
haste of belated consideration. The revision of 
the tariff which ouijht to be made, has not yet 
been made. No action has been taken upon the 
bill which ought to strike forty millions of in- 
ternal taxes from the shoulders of enterprise 
ar.d labor, which ought to disband the remnant 
of the army of internal revenue collectors, and 
reduce the internal revenue establishment to a 
skeleton. These bills and others wait. Need- 
less political discussion blocks the way. 

If right were the opposite of wrong, this 
could- not be right; but rights are of many 
kinds, and some rights are the twins of wr»ng. 
The Constitution says a Senator shall not be 
questioned in any other place for that he utters 
here ; and thus a Senator may, by preamble 



and by speech, slander his countrymen, slan- 
der his Government, slander his country, and 
place it in a false position before the nations 
of the earth. All this may be done to the 
hurt of the public business, to the peril of the 
nation's interests at home and abroad ; and 
there may be no aim or reason in it except to 
affect a presidential election, and to gratify 
passion and wreak vengeance on individuals. 
It may be done boldly in plain words, or it 
may be done by vague and cunning hints ; it 
may be best done by insinuation, the moat 
deadly weapon in slander's virulent vocabu- 
lary. However it be done, if it be done and 
time be wasted iu debate, the waste must be 
charged to those who bring on debate and 
insist upon it. 

The Senator from Ma-ssachusetts would 
have delay. He would not have investigation, 
he would have debate. He would not have 
businesa, he would have talk. He would pre- 
cede investigation by a speech which fills 
seven columns in the Globe, and which could 
not go unchallenged. He would utter state- 
ments in advance, which could not eecap« 
exposure and denial. 

He said his speech was not political. What 
was it? What was its aim and object? Was 
it to obtain investigation? The whole Senate 
proffered that. To use a favorite expression 
of the Senator's, the proposition to investii^te 
was '"hailed" throughout the Chamber ; there 
was not one dissenting voice. " Turn on the 
lights," " Turn on the lights," was the demand 
on every side the moment we heard the dark 
insinuations of the Senator. He himself, and 
he alone, asked that his resolution should lie 
over and not be acted upon at the time he 
introduced it. He himself requested that 
it should wait, that debate might proceed ; 
and I pause here to send to the Secretary the 
New York Tribune, from which I ask that an 
editorial may be read. I have marked it. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows from the 
New York Tribune of February 15, 1872: 

The Armi Soandnl. — If we regarded the defea.t 
of the renomination of Oeuoral Grant as the sole 



object and end of political work at this moment, 
we would be perfectly satisfied with the perform- 
ances of his thick-and-tbin partisans in the Senate 
and in the press. If they had a particle of sagacity 
left they would not for a moment suffer themselves 
to be placed in a position so humiliating and so 
untenable as that which they have voluntarily as- 
sumed. When Senator Sumner iutroduced his res- 
olution calling for the oppointmeiU of a committee 
to inventiaute the suapicious circumstances con- 
nected with the sale of United States arms to the 
agents of the French Oevernment of National De- 
fense, thePrcBident's partisans in the Senate at first 
prevented the consideration of tlie resolution., while 
their liveried organ in New \ork followed its usual 
custom of denouncing the Senator who introduced 
the resolution, ascribing to him and to all who sup- 
port the demand for an inquiry those mean motives 
which alone it is able to comprehend. Is it possible 
that they knoxo what they are doing? Do they not 
see thut this is the course which leads to the utter 
ruin of politicians and of parties f This is a matter 
which cannot be hid out of sight. Every moment 
of resistance increases the general suspicion and 
indignation. For a day the country and the inde- 
pendent press axoaited the action of the Senite. 
During this pause of attention the janizaries of the 
Senate and their newsijaper lackeys drew a breath 
of relief, and one of them yesterday began to exult 
that the movement for investigation had, to use its 
own choice English, 'fallen comparatively still- 
born.' They saw a new light on the subject yes- 
terday, however, and the resolution passed with- 
out serious opposition. Now, let no one resist or 
delay a thorough and searching examination of this 
matter." 

Mr. CONKLING. I take the Senate to wit- 
ness the calumny there recorded ; I take the 
Senator from Massachusetts himself to witness 
it. I refer to the records of the Senate, to 
the Journal, and the Globe, to prove that 
the Senator himself, and the Senator alone, 
requested that no action should be taken 
on the resolution when it was brought for- 
ward, but that it might lie over and wait. 
Mr. SUMNER. Lie over and be printed. 
Mr. CONKLING. "Lie over and be 
printed." Of course lie over and wait. The 
Senator chose his own time to call it up, and 
the Senate voted to put aside all else that the 
Senator might proceed. Yet, Mr. President, 
such is the violence done to truth in a wanton 
and ruthless crusade for political effect. 

What was the aim and object of the Sena- 
tor's speech? It could not be to secure in- 
vestigation. No plea was needed to obtain 
inquiry ; there has never been a moment since 
the resolution was heard that the Senator 
coutd escape inquiry had he wished to do so. 
What was tbe purpose of his speech ? Was it 
to prejudge the truth and forecast it against 
us? Was it to assist France and French 
claim agents in prosecuting claims against 
American ruerchauls and American citizens? 
Was it meant to gender suspicion and rouse 
passionate resentment toward those charged 
with executive affairs? Was it meant to make 
the Germans of America believe that bigli 
Republican officials had clutched French blood- 
money in a war in which the whole Republican 
heart beat for Germany? Was it meant to 
help the Democratic party out of its plight of 
sympathy and partisanship for France through- 
out the German war? Was it thought that the 
Germans of America could be persuaded that 



there went from a Republican Administra- 
tion a prayer, a hope, or a wish for French 
success on the burning battle fields where 
Germans and Germany won imperishable re- 
nown? Was it meant to compromise or con- 
vict us before the world for having been false 
to national morals and national vows? Was it 
meant to befoul us in the ey^^s of Christendom ; 
to say to England and to Germany, now when 
Germany's emperor is about to sit as umpire 
upon claims of ours, that the Republic of 
Ainerica had been more perfidious than Eng- 
land ever was? I will read two brief edito- 
rials, one from the New York World, and one 
from the New York Sun, to show the impres- 
sion produced upon the press and the public 
by this strange proceeding. The World says: 

"There was a deliberate violation of the neutral 
obligations of tbe United States. Our Government 
behaved altogether worse toward Germany than the 
British ever did toward us in the gloomiest period 
of our civil war. The Government establishments 
were worked to their fullest capacity iu manufactur- 
ing cartridges for France to be used against Ger- 
many. The most improved patterns of arms were 
sold to the agents of France out of the national 
arsenals. The worst that we have ever charged 
against England is that she permitted private indi- 
viduals to build ships for the confederates. But our 
Government did not merely allow the Fernch agents 
to purchase arms and ammunition of private manu- 
facturers, but set all the public establishments in 
full activity to manufacture these things for France 
to be used against Germany. This scandalous affair 
will turn the whole voting German population of 
the United States against General Grant." 

The Sun says: 

"Another point of equal, if not greater import- 
ance, is the fact, which also seems to be proved by 
official evidence, that the workshops of the War 
Department were employed during the period in 
question iu manufacturing cartridges for the I^rench 
Government. It appears that France would not buy 
the arms unless ammunition was furnished to use in 
them; and so great was the power of the military 
ring of speculators that they were able to cruse the 
War Department to furnish these cartridges. This 
was a violation of the laws of neutrality and of 
international obligations far exceedingall that Eng- 
land can be charged with for allowing the Alabama, 
the Florida, and the other confederate cruisers to 
depart from her ports upon their errand of destruc- 
tion. In that case she was guilty of negligence ; but 
in the case of the ammunition manufactured for the 
French during their war with Germany General 
Grant's administration was guilty of taking direct 
part in the war." 

Mr. President, what other impression have 
the Senators from Massachusetts and Missouri 
been laboring to produce? What oiher impres- 
sion did they suppose was to come from the 
assertions of the preamble, and the speeches 
with which they followed it? Bismarck had 
not complu.ned that we had violated the duties 
of neutrality. I Lave a right from the evi- 
dence before us to say that he approved the 
propriety of our course. That true German, 
and Christian gentleman. Baron Von Gerolt, 
who at the time represented the North German, 
Confederation here, never criticised or took 
umbrage at our sales of stores. The origin 
of these criticisms and charges is widely difi'er- 
ent ; and what impression, 1 repeat, except the 
one these newspapers reflect, was expected 
froiu such manifestoes at such a time? 



I have seen an attempt to gild the nnpa- 
triotic features of this proceeding by saying 
that the charge is not aimed at the American 
people. Mr. President, that will not do. The 
lacquer is too thin. We never charged the 
British people with building and fitting out 
rams for the rebels, and making England a 
naval base for the confederacy. We did not 
say the people of Britain permitted these acts. 
We charged the British Government with guilt, 
and our charge meant treaty or war. And when 
these Senators charge the American Govern- 
ment, the acknowledged authorities of our 
country, with acts such as are depicted and 
insinuated in this preamble, it will not do to 
say the charge is harmless because it is not 
leveled at the whole American people. It is 
in effect leveled at the whole American people. 
If the charge were true, the nation aggrieved 
would have the right to hold America respons- 
ible. 

Listen again to some of the imputations we 
have heard. I read the words of the Senator 
from Massachusetts as they stand recorded in 
the Globe : 

"And now, sir, I present this case on suspicions 
aroused abroad and apparently sustained by docu- 
ments here at home. That is al . * * „ 
"American officials suspected 1 Who, sir ^ How 
SHSpected? Eminent they must be if their names 
or their positions are known in France ; not without 
evidence, if suspicion has been awakened so lar 
away." 

And then, quoting what my friend from 
New Jersey [Mr. Fbelinghuysen] most aptly 
styled "the brag of a broker" that he had the 
"strongest influences" at work for him, the 
Senator continued : 

" ' The strongest influences working fnr «s.' Sir. 
•what are the 'strongest influences?' They could 
not be men in the streets or mere attorneys hired 
for the occasion; hardly members of Congress; they 
must be men near the business in hand. 

Who are these insinuations meant to hit? 
What impression are they meant to carry 
abroad ? Can you imagine a British peer utter- 
in*^ words like these in the House of Lords at 
random ? Can you imagine a British peer utter- 
ing such words about his Government unless 
they were wrung from him by conviction after 
thorough examination, and when judgment and 
conscience would no longer permit him to 
doubt? Can you understand the utterance of 
SQch words by an American Senator unless he 
had made sure of his ground ? Can you imagine 
a Senator professing to belong to the political 
party charged with the administration of the 
Government, making such statements in his 
place, without having ^aken every pains to ascer- 
tain their truth, ay, without having taken a 
bond of fate to guard against mistake? 

The Senator tells us he knew of this subject 
before December. Ay, long before Decem- 
ber. I speak in the hearing of Senators who 
know that weeks before December, this mat- 
ter was being prepared and trained as a mine, 
the explosion of which would destroy officials 
"eminent" indeed, even higher than the rep- 



resentatives of the people, higher than mem- 
bers of Congress. 

The honorable Senator says he kept his 
design locked up in the depths of his own 
consciousness. He revealed it to no one. 
Let me read his words : 

"At any rate, I know that no human being had 
reason to suppose I was to move in it until I did. 

Here, Mr. President, is a remarkable phe- 
nomenon. The substance of this portentous 
preamble and resolution, was published in 
Boston, in Chicago, and in Cincinnati, before 
it was presented here, with an announcement 
that it was to be presented on the next day. 
Can anything be found in clairvoyance or 
psychology to exceed this? Burke said the 
age of chivalry had passed away ; but clearly 
the age of miracles is still upon us. 

We know that the honorable Senator is very 
near the press; but there is nothing in the 
nearness of Damon and Pythias, nor of Romeo 
and Juliet, which comes so close to absolute 
oneness as this. I might borrow the language 
of a hymn, and say of the newspaper men and 
the Senator — 

" They know the words he means to speak 
Ere from his opening lips they break." 

[Laughter.] 

It is marvelous that such silence, such reti- 
cence, such reluctance, should not have kept 
this huge affair from being darkly hinted in 
political circles for months, and from being 
recorded in newspapers before it broke upon 
the ears of the Senate. It is possible that as 
men engaged in daring and perilous ventures, 
sometimes cast lots as to which shall do the 
deed, so there was, down to a recent period, 
some doubt as to who should bear the match 
that was to fire the fuse, that was to explode 
the bomb, that was to destroy a dreaded pres- 
idential candidate, and disable all who sustain 
him. The cast of characters may not have 
been agreed on, nor the heavy part given to 
the Senator till late. 

But the Senator from Massachusetts knew 
of the matter for weeks ; did he take one 
natural, one generous or just step to ascertain 
the truth of his assertions? He alleges in his 
preamble — and I wish once more to call atten- 
tion to the language— this : 

" It appears from the official report of the Secre- 
tary of War that in the year 1870-71 the sale of ord- 
nance stores reached the sum of $10,000,000, from 
which, according to the report, only a small sum was 
retained to meet the expenses of preparing other 
stores for sale" — 

Now mark, Mr. President : 

" while the official report of the Secretary of the 
Treasury for the same year acknowledges the receipt 
of only $8,286,131 70, showing a difference of over 
$1,700,000." 

This charge I understand to be withdrawn 
now ; but why was it published and sent 
throughout two hemispheres? That is the ques- 
tion, ''l have heard the Senator quote a say- 
ing which he thinks started with Fisher Ames, 



6 



that a lie will run a mile while the truth is 
putting on its shoes and stockings; and why 
was such a calumny sent to traverse earih 
and sea without some pains being taken in 
advance to see whether even apparently it had 
the shadow of foundation? 'Ihe very official 
report referred to, on its face disproves it. No 
allegation can be more false, none more palpa- 
bly false, than the allegation that the finance 
report in question acknowledges the receipt of 
only $8,286,131. It is doubly untrue. First, 
no such thing appears ; and second, the reverse 
appears. 

One word from the Secretary of the Treas- 
nry, one word from any clerk connected with 
the accounts in the Treasury Department, 
would have dispelled and exploded this de- 
lusion. The War Department is in sight of 
the windows of the Senator from Massachu- 
setts. In that Department lies a record, an 
original record, proving immutably by items 
every sale of arms. The lodgings of the Sec- 
retary of War are divided from the lodgings 
of the Senator from Massachusetts, only by a 
street. A biscuit can be tossed froni one to 
the other. Knowing of this subject since be- 
fore December, did the honorable Senator 
take the pains to inquire of his neighbor and 
constituent, the Secretary of the Treasury, or 
of his immediate neighbor here, the Secretary 
of War? No, sir. I have a right to say no, 
for I pressed the Senator upon that point. 
When he objected to an interruption by the 
Senator from Iowa [Mr. Harlan] to correct 
his Associated Press dispatch, I asked him 
whether he had taken the trouble to inquire 
if the sale he sought to show by the news- 
paper, had in fact occurred, the statement of 
the Secretary of War not showing it ; and his 
answer stands recorded : 

" I have held no communication with the Depart- 
menton the subject." 

No communication with the Department; 
but the tedious labor of rolling back and ran- 
sacking newspaper files was not distasteful 
when the object was to impeach the word of 
the Secretary of War ; and accordingly, the 
ponderous files of the New York Times were 
turned back a year and three months, to find 
an Associated Press dispatch in October, 
1870— for what ? To prove that the Secretary 
of War certified falsely when he sent a com- 
munication to the House rendering an account 
of his stewardship in the disposition of ord- 
nance stores. 

But whatwilltheSenatethink,if itturns out 
that this Associated Press dispatch, brought in 
for such a purpose, nowhere slates any sale of 
arms or of ordnance stores ? Let me read It: 

" The bids under the advertisements of October 
17, opened at tho Ordnance Bureau yesterday, are 
OS follows." 

"The bids- opened are as follows" — not 
an intimation that they were accepted; not 
a statement whether they were rejected or 
accepted ; but the Senator, with the Treasury 
Depaitment on his way to the Capitol, with 



the Secretary of War at his elbow, waited 
through the gay and leisurely holiday season, 
and came into the Senate in the month of 
February, no question having been asked of 
either Secretary, and read, that the natioQ 
might hear, an Associated Press dispatch, 
empty in fact, and introduced for no purpose 
save to impeach the word of the Secretary of 
War. 

But this was not enough. The Secretary 
was to be chased yet further with the hot foot 
of hostile eagerne^. The Senator saya: 
"They"— 

That is, the authorities — 
"took no initiative, but sent a report to the other 
House which on examination excited still further 
suspicion." * * « * "But, sir, this report 
which I hold in my hand, nnd which was sent hero 
to counteract the inquiry already foreseen "— 

There is a pleasant suggestion. For gener- 
ous candor and charity, commend me to a fling 
like that. Let nie give a moment to it. Sent 
to Congress " to counteract the inquiry already 
foreseen 1" Why should the Secretary of War 
wish to thwart an inquiry ; why could he wish to 
thwart it, except that " conscience dues make 
cowards of us all?" Does not every one see the 
imputation, the double imputation, in this lan- 
guage : first, that the Secretary of War had a 
guilty consciousness, the black drop in his 
heart we call guilty motive, to escape the 
investigation ; and second, that he made aa 
attempt to circumvent and evade investigation 
by a trick upon the House of Repreeealativee ? 
But further says the Senator : 

" If you look at it"— 

That is, at this report — 
" you will find on its face— how shall I express it ?— 
an incompleteness, if not a slovenline* of prepara- 
tion. Here is this long list containinj the amount 
of sales, but there is no addition, thtre ia no nun 
total at the end. Why waa that otniitedf J hope 
before thia debate ia over that there will be »ome 
explanation of it. J hawi }ieard of an explanation 
from an important quarter, and J await communica- 
tion of it by soma other Senator. I havi taid that thia 
report, eent to the other Chamber aa an anrwer in ad- 
vance to any poieible inquiry, ia ineowtplete/ I am 
almost ready to aay painfully incomplete." 

The row of figures was not added up I Mr. 
President, it was Paul — Paul, the noblest advo- 
cate that ever stood before a court — who said, 
"Though I speak with the tongue of men and 
of angels, and have not charity, I am become 
aa sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal. 

"0,. beware, my lord of jealousy; 
It is the green-eyed monster which doth mook 
The meat it feeds on." 

A great master tells us that — 
" Suspicion always haunts the guilty mind." 

How can a suspicion so unworthy, so base- 
less, so barbarous, find harbor in a breast so 
guileless, so generous, so gentle, so just? 

Mr. President, a scent less keen, eyes less 
bloodshot, prejudices less blinding, passions 
less unpitying, would have avoided many errors 
in this ugly business. Let me speak of one 
strange blunder, if blunder it be, of which you 
have not heard. One of the most odious and 



enormous charges of the preamble ia this: it 
13 alleged, in substance, that France paid our 
Government for arms a great sura of money, 
and that our "oflScials" have not accounted for 
it, but that a deficit is shown by the accounts. 
The Senate will see the elements of this charge. 
The first element is, of course, a purchase from 
our Government ; because if the purchase was 
not from the Government, no such charge, or 
question, or defici'' "v, could exist. The pre- 
amble refers to ' c»athority for this accusa- 
tion. What is the authority? The French 
account, as it appears in the report of a French 
commission. The Senator from Massachu- 
setts produced this report, and he aud the 
Senator from Missouri both used it, and re- 
ferred to it, to sustain, and they stated that it 
did sustain, the allegation based upon it. I 
read now from the preamble: 

Whereas a oomparison of the acoonnts rendered 
by the French Government for moneys expended by 
its. agents in the purchase of arms from the United 
States, and the accounts rendered by the Govern- 
ment of the United States for moneys received in 
the same transaction, show a large ditference, which 
aeeina to hax>e. given rine to the mmpicion abroad thai 
United Statea oficiaUs have taken an undue part 
therein. 

It will be seen that the marrow of this 
count of the indictment is that the United 
States was the seller. The averment is that 
the money was expended " in the purchase of 
arms from the United States." The intention 
ofthe draughtsman does notrest upon the words 
^^from the United States" a'.one, because the 
sentence concludes by saying that " United 
States officials^' are those suspected in the 
transaction. Thus the Senate will see that 
the pith of this specification, and the whole 
sting and force of it, is that arms were pur- 
chased "from" the United States. If arms 
were only purchased in the United States, if 
they were only purchased of citizens and mer- 
chants in America, it would be absurd to talk 
about the Government as a party to the sales ; 
or of " officials," as those who made commis- 
sions or profits. The record produced of the 
French report in which the account of moneys 
paid is given, was the New York Sun. Here 
U is— the Sun of July 12, 1871. 

The Senator from Massachusetts and the 
Senatorfrom Missouri adopted this translation, 
and brought it forward. I have taken the 
trouble to look also at the original in the 
French paper, and poor as are my attainments 
in foreign tongues, I venture the prediction 
that no doubt will be set up as to the correct- 
ness ofthe translation inthe respects to which 
I now call attention. I hold up the record, 
and deny the truth of the version which has 
been given of it. I say there is no such ac- 
count as we have had quoted to us. There is 
no_ statement of hint that a farthing was ever 
paid to the United Stales for arms ; there is 
no hint in this record that arms were ever pur- 
chased/7-o?« the United Stales. The assertion 
in the preamble is a perversion ; it is more, it 
is a fabrication out of whole cloth. The lan- 



guage is more than tortured, it is more than 
garbled ; the true language and sense is omitted 
and suppressed, and other language with dif- 
ferent aud opposite meaning is put in its place. 
I read the PVench record. First comes the 
Sun's editorial preface. It is of value on the 
point I make, because the chief editor of the 
Sun is one of the most accomplished linguists 
in our land, and with a French paper before 
him, he knows what he sees. This is hia intro- 
ductory remark : 

" The commission immediately entered upon its 
labors, and on the 27th of June, Mr. I/'on Riant, to 
whom had been intrusted tbe investigation of the 
purchases of arms and ammunition hero in New 
York, presented to the Assembly his special report." 

Observe the statement: "purchases here in 
New York," not in Washington or of the Gov- 
ernment of the United States. 

Now I come to the passage marked by the 
Senator from Massachusetts. The editor says: 

" In order that our readers may understand the 
whole matter we give a translation of the report of 
M. Rinnt in full, as we find it in the Journal Otiicial 
de la Ropublique Fran^aise, June 28." 

I read now the opening passage ofthe report?: 

''The commission of armament, led at the outset 
of its operations by the insufficiency of the European 
production, to effect purchases of arms in the United 

States "— 

"In the United States," not "from the Uni- 
ted States." Then follows some figures ; and 
I come to the second passage marked by the 

Senator; 

" The majority of the arms purchased in the Uni- 
ted States have been delivered by the firm of R«m- 
ington, or purchased by its intervention," &o. 

Nothing is said of purchases from the Uni- 
ted States. Tbe only statement bearing on 
the point is that the United States is the coun- 
try in which the purchases were made. 

Here, then, is the truth of the matter. The 
French commission make report of arms 
bought in the United States, of arms bought 
in New York, of arms bought in the American 
market, of American dealers. The commis- 
sion does not report that any arms were 
bought from the United States, or that any 
transaction in arms ever took place with the 
Government of the United States — no such 
thing. Yet this report, written and printed fn 
a foreign tongue, is produced here by reference 
and statement, to show not what it does show, 
but what it does not show. The difference 
between the fact and the assertion is as plain 
as between black and white. It is a vital and 
a convenient difference. Truly rendered, the 
report has nothing to do with the case, and 
cannot touch any ofiicial ; but as it has been 
rendered, it has everything to do with the case, 
and soils American officials. Token in con- 
nection with the animus to be seen throughout 
this affair, this error is very suggestive. Such 
a mistake on atrial for horse stealing, might 
disbar an attorney, or rob a witness of his 
liberty. I make no statement or suggestion 
who is guilty of this error or offense. I do not 
know. It would have been a feariul mistake 



8 



in a case where the rights of an individual 
were staked, it is a graver matter where the 
rights and the good name of a nation are in 
the scales. We have heard something of a 
book-keeper, who compared this account with 
the accounts in our Departments. He was not 
named, his name seemed a secret, but if this 
be his handiwork, and he continues his trade, 
he may yet leave a — 

" Name to other times 
Linked with one virtue and a thousand crimes." 

I wish to guard my statement here, and I 
ask my honorable friend from Vermont, [Mr. 
Edmunds,] who has scanned this report and 
translation more closely than I, to witness my 
assertion. Referring to the passages marked, 
(which I have looked at and answer for, myself,) 
and referring also to the entire report, there 
is not, I think, anywhere a statement or a hint 
that arms or ordnance stores were bought from 
the United States, but only a description of 
them as having been purchased in the United 
States. 

Mr. EDMUNDS. No place in it where they 
are spoken of as ever having belonged to the 
United States. 

Mr. CONKLING. I repeat the answer of 
the honorable Senator, as it may not have 
reached the ears of all the Senate, namely, 
that there is no place in that report in which 
it appears that these arms were ever owned 
by the United States. 

Mr. President, how comes all this succes- 
sion of errors or misstatements in this pream- 
ble? There is not one substantial averment 
which has not been pulverized. How came 
they there ? I submit to the Senator himself, 
whether that care and caution due from the 
highest and the humblest in matters affecting 
thtj rights of even individuals, would not have 
shunned errors so manifold and so monstrous. 
If the credulity of any Senator has been im- 
posed upon, I suggest it is high time that it 
should be admitted. 

But blunders are not all, and blunders 
were not enough. The preamble was not 
enough ; the speeches by which it was 
to be followed, were not enough. The 
affair must be huge and sensational to the 
utmost. There must be lightning all around 
the sky. The occasion must be full of signs 
and wonders. Stars must shoot madly from 
their spheres. The whole continent must 
stand aghast, and its blood must freeze at the 
audacity and monstrosity of official sin. The 
whole thing must be grand, gloomy, and pecu- 
liar. We must have a select committee. The 
stage must be crowded with startling and 
theatrical effects! Why a select committee? 
Two months ago the Senate was libeled for 
days if not weeks, because it was suggested 
that it might be wise and convenient to dis- 
tribute investigations among different com- 
mittees ; that it might not be best to have one 
committee for all investigations. We were 
told then, in no polite or measured phrase, 



that to distribute investigations between dif- 
ferent committees, was to cloak fraud and 
stifle investigation. We must have one com- 
mittee, we were told, a standing committee, 
a committee on retrenchment and investiga- 
tion, and this committee, scouring earth and 
sea, must investigate everything. We raised 
the committee. The rest of us have been 
compelled to refer investigations far more sub- 
stantial and useful than this, to that committee. 
Why should not this investigation go there 
also ? Mr. President, I will tell you why. 
There was something beyond the sensation to 
be produced when the people of the country 
should see the curtain rise and discover the 
honorable Senator from Massachusetts with a 
special committee of seven at his back. The 
sensation would of course have been immense, 
the committee would have been majestic, ana 
the affair such a mammoth, that the committee 
in charge of it must have nothing else to do. 
But something beyond this great tableau was 
hoped for in a special Committee. It would, 
of course, if the Senator from Massachusetts 
was to head it, be ;,>., deeply biased committee. 
Had the original mo'tion for a retrenchment 
committee prevailed literally as it was offered 
last April and again last December ; had the 
motion prevailed to revive the old committee 
of which the Senator from New Hampshire, 
now absent, [Mr. Patterson,] was chairman, 
and from which he had been transferred to the 
chairmanship of another committee, leaving 
the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Schubz] the 
seniormember of the retrenchment committee ; 
had that original resolution literally prevailed, 
and cast upon the Vice President the duty of 
reviving the old committee, hampered as he 
would then have been by parliamentary usage 
and etiquette, the Senator from Missouri would 
have been the chairman of the committee. 
Had this snug result been brought about, we 
should have had no motion for a special com- 
mittee here, the "eternal fitness of things " 
would have been fully preserved by having the 
Senator from Missouri the charioteer of a pub- 
lication machine, to address to the Germans 
of the country a report showing that General 
Grant had trampled neutral vows and obliga- 
tions under foot, and sided with France in that 
bloody grapple for the mastery in which she 
went down before Germany. Ay, sir, we are 
indebted to the accident that we created a new 
committee, in place of reviving the old one 
with the Senator from Missouri at its head, for 
amotion raising a select committee, whose mis- 
sion in part would be to illustrate a principle 
in physics known as the indefinite expansibility 
of matter, to show the world into how great a 
balloon, a matter of no moment in truth or in 
fact, could be blown. 

And now I want a word with the Senator from 
Missouri, [Mr. Schurz.] I shall speak with the 
same confidence and frankness with which he 
addressed us on a recent occasion. That honor- 
able Senator informed the Republican mem- 



9 



bers of the Senate — no, I correct myself; that 
statement is inndequate : I should say that in 
solemn and weighty words he divulged to the 
Republican members of the Senate an impres- 
sion, dark and wide, in the country, that there 
exists somewhere a " military ring." Let me 
read the language of the Senator : 

"But, gentlemen, do not close your eyes to one 
fact— and her'i I will express myself frankly and 
boldly." 

That is right ; I like a bold man. 

"There is an impression prevailins in this country 
that somewhere in this Government there sits a 
'military ring,' which is exercising an unwholesome, 
a far-reaching, a corrupt, and dangerous influence 
upon this Administration. That impression is grow- 
ing all over the land. This suspicion may be well- 
founded or it may not." 

My acquaintance with the people of the 
country may not be as extensive as that of the 
honorable Senator from Missouri ; but the peo- 
ple I meet, have, I think, no such impression. 
They hear talk about a " military ring." They 
regard that talk as a part 'of the slang and 
scandal that defiles and brutalizes our politics. 
They read paragraphs in newspapers talking 
abouta " military ring,'' an*?! they dismiss them 
with other such, regarding these reeking pub- 
lications as among the brutalities of progress. 
But, Mr. President, I want to tell the Sen- 
ator of an impression that does prevail. There 
is an impression with many people — it is com- 
ing, I am sorry to say, to be a fixed impres- 
sion — that another ring exists — a "senatorial 
ring," or, more properly speaking, a "sen- 
atorial cabal." The impression is that the 
business of this senatorial cabal, is not to fur- 
nish ammunition to the French, but to furnish 
ammunition to the Democratic party. It is 
believed that men flying the Republican flag, 
are trying to strand the Republican ship, it 
is believed that the business of this cabal is to 
malign the President of the United States, to 
disparage and belittle him, to assault his 
administration, to wait for opportunities, ay, 
in the language of the good Book, "to lurk 
privily" for opportunities, to place him in an 
injurious and unjust position. It is believed 
that the business of this cabal is to assail and 
impugn the majority in Congress, and to injure 
those charged with the conduct of public 
affairs. It is believed that this cabal aids to 
get up and keep up that snow-storm of libels, 
too great in volume to be measured, which falls 
daily on the country ; that stream of sliame- 
less'falsehoods which, taking its rise in Wash- 
ington, pours itself over the land through " in- 
dependent" and avowed Democratic papers. 

It is believed that persons connected with this 
cabal are inflicting wounds upon the Repub- 
lican party whicliDemocrats have not the power 
to inflict ; wounds, which these same persons 
could not make so deep, if they would put on 
Democratic armor and let it be seen. This 
impression waxes apace. It is strong, very 
strong just now, in the State of New Hamp- 
shire. There is fresh reason for it in New 



Hampshire. An election depends there, and 
the politicians say that whether the Repub- 
lican ticket shall stand or fall, is of much import 
for the light or shadow it will cast on the 
coming presidential canvass. In the thick of 
the New Hampshire contest, shrewd Demo- 
cratic politicians treasure like "apples of gold 
in pictures of silver" the words of mem- 
bers of this supposed senatorial cabal ; their 
speeches command attention with the New 
Hampshire Democracy, which could not be 
gained by all the Democratic heroes and sages 
from Jefferson to my honorable friend from 
Missouri, [Mr. Blair,] not even for the Brod- 
head letter. [Laughter.] That_ vivacious 
production is not so great a favorite now, it 
is not such a success, or, as the play bills 
say, it has not such "a run" in New Hanip- 
shire now, as another document, which lies 
before me. Here is a pamphlet consisting of 
twenty-four closely printed pages. It is enti- 
tled " Plain' language of independent Repub- 
lican Senators;" "Thieving and profligacy 
exposed;" "Speeches of several Senators;" 
first of all, the honorable Senator from Mis- 
souri, [Mr. .ScHDRZ.] This pamphlet bears 
the following imprimatur: "Published by 
the National Democratic Resident Committee, 
Washington, District of Columbia." These 
speeches appear without note or comment ; no 
gilding fine gold here; no painting the lily. 
Those who prepared the pamphlet, thought 
they would let the speeches be as their makers 
made them, and stop where their makers 
stopped them, because they could not be im- 
proved as electioneering documents for the 
Democracy. I am told that two hundred thou- 
sand copies of this pamphlet have been sent 
free through the mails of the United States 
franked by the Democratic members of the 
House, into the State of New Hampshire. 

Such events, and such a proceeding as now 
detains the Senate, I tell the honorable Sena- 
tor will not tend to dispel the impression that 
there does exist such a cabal. The proceed- 
ing before us, wears an ugly look ; the business 
of turning accuser of the Government, and 
charging a breach of neutrality touching Ger- 
many at this time, has an ugly look. It is 
not giving information to the enemy in time 
of war, but there is a sort of family resem- 
blance between the two things, which will lead 
a great many people into serious thought. A 
great many people will think of it as the man 
thought of his horses when he said, "One 
looks so much like both, that I cannot tell the 
other from which." [Laughter.] 

But, Mr. President, 1 am able to assure the 
Senator, and I hope the assurance will give 
him pleasure, that the people in no portion of 
the country, as far as' I can learn, are being 
misled by these proceedings. They understand 
the meaning of it all. In the Stale of New 
York, during the last fortnight, many elections 
have beeu held; the spring elections are pro- 
gressing, and East and West, not only de the 



10 



Republicans hold their own, but elections 
result in unexpected, and in some cases unex- 
ampled Republican gains. Tiie people be- 
lieve in the Administration, and in tbe ilepub- 
lican party as the party of progress and true 
reform. 

The other day, in the city of Buffalo, a Dem- 
ocratic city, in which there is a large repre- 
sentation of that sturdy, intelligent, upright 
peojj J, the Germans of America, the llepub- 
licaii ticket was chosen by a majority of nearly 
twenty-five hundred ; most of the wards giving 
Ilepublican majorities. The .same thing in less 
decree is true generally in the recent and cur- 
rent elections in the State of New York. 

No, Mr. President, the pretense that there 
is a ''military ring" gives no disquiet to men 
who believe the cause of the Republican party 
identical with the cause of the Republic; and 
with no right to speak lor them, I venture to 
say that tlie Germans of the Sta'e of New 
York and of the other States, cannot be hood- 
winked, -r nose-led, or handed over, by any 
man, wb ver he may be. The Germans had 
too much to do with preserving our nationality 
when it rocked in the throes of an earthquake, 
to be willing so soon to hand the country over 
again to the party which once well-nigh ruined 
it. The Germans know that it was a Dem- 
ocratic Administration which prostrated our 
credit; which stripped our northern arsenals 
of arms and sent them to be ready for traitors 
in the South ; which banished our Navy to dis- 
tant seas; and sought to bind the Government 
hand and foot that conspirators might murder 
it in its bed. The Germans know that a Dem- 
ocratic Administration did all this and more, 
and that the Democratic party before, and 
during the war, and since the war, has been 
hostile to liberty, equality, law, public faith, 
and national honor. 

Napoleon said Europe would be republican 
or Cossack ; and in the next presidential elec- 
tion our country will be Republican or Dem- 
ocratic. Gernians and all other men of sense 
know this ; they know that third-party move- 
ments, and Republican detections, mean aid to 
the Democratic party; and such a woe. must 
have something more to commend it, than the 
griefs or resentments of individuals. 

Will the Senator join with me, or will he let 
me join with him, in removing the impression, 
if there be an impression al)road, that there 
exists a " military ring" on the one hand, and 
the impression also that there exists a sen- 
atorial ring, I'atally bent on mi>chief, determ- 
ined to divide, disintegrate, and destroy the 
great party of progress and reform ? Will the 
honorable Senator join me in dispelling these 
two murky appearances? 

Mr. President, it was not my purpose to 
trespass thus long on the patience of the Sen- 
ate; yet it is my wish to say something touch- 
ing the transactions referred to in the pream- 
ble as they in truth look place. When our 
great struggle for nationality was over we 



found ourselves possessed of a great aggre- 
gate, not only of arms, but of stores, mate- 
rial, and munitions of war. This mass of 
perishable property was to be sold, and at 
sale by public outcry, it found only a tardy 
market. It was being eaten by the tooth of 
time; rust would corrode metals; moisture 
would destroy powder, and everything would 
lose value, beside loss of interest and stor- 
age. In 18G8, on the 20th of July, Congress 
passed an act to hasten the disposal of this 
surplus. The object was to turn these stores 
into money at the first hour, and therefore 
the act authorized private sales. We had not 
only arms, but all parts of arms; we had not 
only cartridges, but all parts of cartridges ; 
pig lead, powder, and metal. These articles 
were sold, sometimes "assembled" — using a 
phrase of the trade — all parts of the gun 
"assembled," that is, put together as a com- 
plete article. Sometimes, as the schedule of 
sales will show, these parts were sold sep- 
arately — gun stocks, for instance, by them- 
selves, in a lot, gun-barrels by themselves, and 
so on. The Senator (rom Missouri thinks he 
has discovered that under the statute it would 
not be lawful for the ordnance department to 
"assemble" the different parts of a cartridge 
in order to make it marketable, but that they 
must sell these parts separated, and as raw 
material. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Will the honorable Sena- 
tor from New York just permit me a question 
which I put iu perfect good faith for my 
information? 

Mr. CONKLTNG. Certainly. 

Mr. SCHURZ. There is one portion of this 
statute which I do not really understand, and 
1 should like to have his legal opinion about 
it, distinguished lawyer as he is : 

"That the Secretary of War be, and he is hereby, 
authorized and directed to cause to be sold, after 
ofi'er at public sale on thirty days' notice, in such 
manner and at such times and places at public or 
private sale as he may deem most advantaKeous to 
the public interests," &c. 

Inasmuch as the Senator from New York 
has referred to there being some latitude given 
to him whether he is to sell at public or pri- 
vate sale, 1 should like to know how he con- 
strues this clause : 

" Authorized and directed to cause to be sold, 
after offer at public sale on thirty days' notice." 

Mr. CONKLING. Is that the Senator's 
question ? 

Mr. SCHUE^Z. That is my question. 

Mr. CONKLING. Will it be agreeble to 
the Senator to allow me to postpone my answer 
for a space? I will come to it presently. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Certainly. Ididnotmean 
to interrupt the Senator's argument. 

Mr. CONKLING. I meant to remark on 
the mode of sale, and I am obliged to the 
Senator for calling my attention to it. 1 pro- 
ceed, ho\Vever, now to complete a different 
point to which I was in the act of speaking. 
The Senator from Missouri understands that 



11 



the statute works a disability to prepare or put 
in order for sale stores, or at least ammuni- 
tion, or, more correctly speaking, that it does 
not contemplate or admit the power to prepare 
the wares tor sale. I think that is his idea. 

Mr. SCHCTRZ. I beg the Senator's pardon. 
I did not say that the statute did not contem- 
plate the putting together of the different ma- 
terials out of which ammunition is composed ; 
but I did say that I did not think the statute 
contemplated the manufacturing of ammuni- 
tion for the purposes of sale. 

Mr. CONKLING. Somebody has said that 
words are things. I wonder if the Senator 
from Missouri would say so. I stated his point 
to be that under the statute they could not 
before sale jjroperly put together the different 
parts of a cartridge and make it a complete 
mai-ketable thing. He says that is not his 
point, but his point is that they cannot manu- 
facture. 

Mr. SCHURZ. I beg pardon. 

Mr. CONKLING. Then I do not under- 
stand the Senator. 

Mr. SCHURZ. That the ordnance depart- 
ment may put together tlie diti'erent materials 
which constitute a cartridge there can be no 
doubt in the world, for they have got to do 
so for the use of the Army. The question is 
this: whether a statute allowing the ordnance 
department to sell material which is unsuited, 
or unsuitable as the statute expresses it, for 
the use of the Army or of the militia of the 
United States, permits the ordnance depart- 
ment to manufacture cartridges for sale? That 
: is what I say. 

Mr. CONKLING. The honorable Senator 
I suppose does not understand that this par- 
ticular statute gives the power to manufacture 
cartridges for use in the American Army. 

Mr. SCHURZ. No, sir, that the statute 
does not give any such power. 

Mr. CONKLING. Then let us lay that 
matter out of the case, and let us assume that 
he and I alike are discussing what might be 
done under the statute now in question, and 
for the purposes of the statute. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Precisely. 

Mr. CONKLING. Let me restate the Sen- 
ator's point, because I am not one of those 
who suppose advantage can be gained by mis- 
stating or undervaluing the position of an ad- 
versary. Let me state his point as strongly as 
I can. It is that under that statute the ord- 
nance department had no right to take the 
different component parts of cartridges and 
put them together in finished cartridges, and 
then sell them. Is not that his point? 

Mr. SCHURZ. Exactly. 

Mr. CONKLING. So I first intended to 
stale it, and I think I did. Let me examine 
the point. Does the Senator think that under 
that statute there is power to scour or burnish 
guns in order to make them marketable? 
Does the Senator think that if a thousand 
pieces lack ramrods, there is authority to sup- 



ply the ramrods, to make them marketable ? 
Does he think that if one hundred pieces have 
lost their bayonets, there is power to make or 
finisli bayonets and put them on ? If he admits 
this power, his argument falls to the ground? 
Why ? Because the object of putting a ram- 
rod upon a piece, or a nipple, or a hammer, 
or a guard, would be to make it marketable as 
merchandise; and if in order to make a vu- 
sand pieces marketable as merchandise, it is 
necessary to furnish v.^itli them their comple- 
ment of ammunition, the power is the same, 
the purpose is the same, the legal test is the 
same ; the two cases, as the lawyers say, are 
on all fours with each other. Does not the 
honorable Senator see that? 

Now look at the proposition practically. 
Here was the Government an enormous holder 
of pig lead ; millions of pounds, more per- 
haps than could be found in all the country 
beside, were in the arsenals and manufacto- 
ries of the Government. Does the Senator 
think that although they could sell o many 
tons of pig lead, and so many hundred pounds 
of powder, and although they could sell so 
much sheet copper to make cartridges with, 
they could not put these things together and 
sell them as a marketable article, if the price 
and the sale not only of the ammunition, 
but of the guns to go with it, depended on 
the ammunition? The Senator's argument 
proves too much. The statute means nothing 
useful, unless it implies the power to burnish 
arms, to make them serviceable and market- 
able, to repair them, to add a ramrod or a 
bayonet; and I call the Senator's attention to 
the fact that in the report of the War Depart- 
ment, which once played so large a part in 
this case, the report which was at first relied 
on for the novr post mortem discrepancy, it is 
said expressly that money has been retained 
to put in order the residue of the stores for 
sale. The argument of the Senator would 
prove that the Secretary admits that he vio- 
lated the statute there. The argument would 
prove that buyers must take the arms as tliey 
were rusted on tlie field of battle, blemished 
by the dew-fall, broken by the shock, take 
them as debris and refuse instead of buying 
them in good and merchantable order. This 
would be absurd. 

Mr. MORTON. Will the Senator from 
New York allow me to call his attention to 
the fact, in answer to the question of the Sen- 
ator from Missouri, that the ordnance depart- 
ment has authority by other statutes to go 
forward at any time, whenever there is an 
immediate prospect of war or an immediate 
prospect of sale, to manufacture into fixed 
ammunition all the raw material on hand, not 
depending upon this statute at all for that 
authority ? 

Mr. CONKLING. This is true no doubt. 

Mr. SCHURZ. May I ask the Senatoi from 
New York whether he has got through wiih 
this point of the argument? I do not want to 



12 



reply to him. I shall do so at a subsequent 
period, but 1 might now call liis attention to 
the question which I took the liberty of putting 
to him with regard to the meaning of the 
statute, 

Mr. CONKLING. If the Senator is impa- 
tient for my answer, I will answer him now. 

Mr. SCaURZ. No. 

Mr. CONKLING. If he is not, I will renew 
the assurance given him a few moments ago, 
that I shall not omit that answer; and I will 
fortify my assurance by saying that I have a 
memorandum on my notes of that point, and 
my memorandum, and the Senator, and I to- 
gether, will be able to take care that the mat- 
ter is not forgotten. 

Mr. President, this statute existing, and the 
ordnance department being, in the language 
of Vattel, engaged in its "customary trade," 
■war suddenly reddened the fields of France 
and Germany. Tiie cable flashed the news to 
us, and the President of the United States 
forthwith addressed to the American people a 
proclamation of caution touching their duties 
as citizens of a neutral power. 1 ask the Sec- 
retarj^ to read that proclamation as I have 
marked it in the volume which I send to the 
desk. It contains a full epitome of neutral 
duties. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows : 

By the President of the United States of America. 

A PEOCLAIIATION. 

"Whereas a state of war uuhapiiily exists between 
Prance on the one side, and the North (ierman Con- 
federation and its allies on the other; 

And whereas the .United States are on terms of 
friendship and ainity with all the con tending Powers, 
and with thepersous inhabiting their several domin- 
ions; 

And whereas great numbers of the citizens of the 
United States reside within the territories or domin- 
ions of each of the said belligerents and carry on com- 
merce, trade, or other business or pursuits therein, 
protected by the faith ot treaties; 

And whereas great numbers of the subjects or cit- 
izens of each ot the said belligerents reside within 
the territory or jurisdiction of the United States, 
and carry on commerce, trade, or other business or 
pursuits therein; 

And whereas the laws of the United States, with- 
out interfering with the free expression of opinion 
and sympathy, or with the open n\anufacture orsale 
of arms or munitions of war, nevertheless impose 
upon all persons who may be within their territory 
and jurisdiction the duty of an impartial neutrality 
during the existence of the contest: 

Now, therefore, I, Ulysses S. Grant, President of 
the United States, in order to |)reserve the neu- 
trality of the United States, and of their citizens and 
of persons within their territory and jurisdiction, 
and to enforce their laws, and in order that all per- 
sons, being warned of the general tenor of the laws 
and treaties of the United States in this behalf, and 
of the law of nations, may thus be preventeil from 
an unintentional violation of thesame, dohereby de- 
clare and i)roclaim that by the act passed on the2Uth 
day of April, A, D. 1818, commonly known as the 
"neutrality law," the following acts are forbidden 
to be done, under severe penalties, within the terri- 
tory and jurisdiction of the United States, to wit : 

1. Accepting and exercising a commission to serve 
either of the said belligerents by land or by sea 
against the other belligerent. 

2. Enlisting or entering into the service of either 
of the said belligerents as a soldier, or as a marine, 
or seaman on board of any vessel of war, letter of 
marque, or privateer. 



3. Hiring or retaining another person to enlist or 
enter himself in the service of either of the said 
belligerents as a soldier, or as a marine or seaman 
on board of any vessel of war, letter of marque, or 
privateer. 

4. Hiring another person to go beyond the limits 
or jurisdiction of the United States with intent to 
be enlisted as aforesaid. 

5. Hiring another person to go beyond the limits 
of the United States with intent to be entered into 
service as aforesaid. 

6. Retaining another person to go beyond the lim- 
its of the United States with intent to be enlisted as 
aforesaid. 

7. Retaining another person to go beyond the 
limits ol the United States with intent to be entered 
into service as aforesaid. (But the said act is not to 
be construed to extend to a citizen orsubject of either 
belligerent who, being transiently within the United 
States, shall, on board of any vessel of war, which, 
at the time of its arrival within the United States, 
wa^! fitted and equipped as such vessel of war, enlist 
or enter himself or hire or retain another subject or 
citizen of the same belligerent, who is transiently 
within the United States, to enlist or enter himself 
to serve such belligerent on board such vessel of war, 
if the United States shall then be at peace with such 
belligerent.) 

8. Fitting out and arming, or attempting to fit out 
and arm, or procuring to bo fitted out and armed, 
or knowingly being concerned in the furnishing, fit- 
ting out, or arming of any ship or vessel with intent 
that such ship or vessel shall be employed in the 
service of either of the said belligerents. 

9. Issuing or delivering a commission within the 
territory or jurisdiction of the United States for any 
ship or vessel, to the intent that she may be em- 
ployed as aforesaid. 

lU. Increasing or augmenting, or procuring to be 
increased or augmented, or knowingly being con- 
cerned in increasing or augmenting, the force of any 
ship of war, cruiser, or other armed vessel which at 
the time of herarrival within the United States was a 
shi)) of war, cruiser, or armed vessel, iu the service 
of either of the said belligerents, or belonging to the 
subjects or citizens of either, by adding to the num- 
ber of guns of such vessel, or by changing those on 
board of her for guns of a larger Caliber, or by the 
addition thereto of any equipment solely applicable 
to war. 

11. Beginning, or setting on foot, or providing, or 
preparing, the means for any military expedition or 
enterprise to be carried on from the territory or 
jurisdiction of the United States against the terri- 
tories or dominions of either of the said belligerents. 

And I do I'urther declare and proclaim that by the 
nineteenth article of the treaty of amity and com- 
merce, which was concluded between his M;ijesty the 
king of Prussia and the United States of America on 
the 11th day of July, A. D. 1799, which article was 
revived by the treaty of May 1, A. D. 1828, between 
the same parties, and is still in force, it was agreed 
that ■' the vessels of war, i)ublic and private, of 
both parties, shall carry freely, wheresoever they 
please, the vessels and effects taken from their ene- 
mies, without being obliged to pay any duties, 
charges, or fees to officers of admiralty, of the cus- 
toms, or any others; nor shall such prizes be ar- 
rested, searched, or put under legal process when 
they come to and enter the ports of the other party, 
but may freely bo carried out again at any time by 
their captors to the places expressed in their com- 
missions, which the commanding oliioer of such ves- 
sel shall be obliged to show." 

And I do further declare and proclaim that it has 
been officially communicated to the Government of 
the United States by the envoy extraordinary and 
minister plenipotentiary of the North German Con- 
federation at Washington that private property on 
the high seas will be exemiited from seizure by the 
ships of his jM;ijcsty the king of Prussia, without 
regard to reciprocity. 

And I do further declare and proclaim that it has 
been officially communicated to the Government of 
the United States by the envoy extraordinary and 
minister plenipotentiary of his Miijr.-ty the emperor 
of the French, at Washington, that orders have 
been given that in the conduct of the war the com- 



13 



manders of the French forces on land and on the 
aeag shall scrupulously observe toward neutral Pow- 
ers the rules of international law, and that they 
shall strictly adhere to the principles set forth in 
the declaration of the congress of Paris of the IGtli 
of April, 1856, that is to say: first, that privateering 
is and remains abolished; second, that the neutral 
flag covers enemy's goods with the exception of con- 
traband of war; third, that neutral goods, with the 
exception of contraband of war, are not liable to 
capture under the enemy's flag; fourth, tha_t block- 
ades, in order to be binding, must be effective, that 
is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to 
prevent access to thecoastof the enemy; and that, 
although the United States have not adhered lo the 
declaration of 1856, the vessels of his Majesty will 
not seize enemy's property found on board of a ves- 
sel of the United States, provided that property is 
not contraband of war. 

And I do further declare and proclaim that the 
statutes of the United States and the law of nations 
alike require that no person within the territory and 
jurisdiction of the United States shall take part, 
directly or indirectly, in the said war, but shall re- 
main at peace with each of the said belligerents, and 
shall maintain a strict and impartial neutrality; 
and that whatever privileges shall be accorded 
to one belligerent within the ports of the United 
States shall be, in like manner, accorded to the 
other. 

And I do hereby enjoin all the good citizens of the 
United States and all persons, residing or being within 
the territory or jurisdiction of the United States, to 
observe the laws thereof, and to commit no act con- 
trary to the provisions of the said statutes, or in vio- 
lation of the law of nations in that behalf. 

And I do hereby warn all citizens of the United 
States and all persons residing or being within their 
territory or jurisdiction, that, while the free and 
full expression of sympathies in public and private 
is not restricted by the laws of the United States, 
military forces in aid of either belligerent cannot 
lawfully be originated or organized within their 
jurisdiction; and that while all persons may law- 
fully, and without restriction by reason of the afore- 
said state of war, manufacture and sell within the 
United States arms and munitions of war, and other 
articles ordinarily known as "contraband of war," 
yet they cannot carry such articles upon the high 
seas for the use or service of either belligerent, nor 
can they transport soldiers and ofBoers of either, or 
attempt to break any blockade which may be law- 
fully established and maintained during the war, 
without incurring the risk of hostile capture, and the 
penalities denounced by the law of nations in that 
behalf. 

And I do hereby give notice that all citizens of 
the United States and others who may claim the 
protection of this Government, who may misconduct 
themselves in the premises, will do so at their peril, 
and that they can in no wise obtain any protection 
from the Government of the United States against 
the consequences of their misconduct. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand 
and caused the seal of the United States to be 
affixed. 

Done at the city of Washington, this 22d day of 
August in the year of our Lord 1870, and of 
[h. s.] the Independence of the United States of 
America the ninety-fifth. 

U. S. GRANT. 

By the President: 

HAMILTON Fish, Secretary of State. 

Mr. CONKLING. That proclamation fol- 
lowed the announcement of war at. once. 
Before, its issuance, E. Remington & Sons, on 
live, different occasions, had been large buyers 
of ordnance stores ; they had bought large 
amounts in lots and groups of lots. And just 
here it will not be out of place for me to ask 
who are the Remingtons, and who is Samuel 
Remington? A brief and sufficient answer will 
be found in Senate Executive Document No. 
72, of the second session of the Thirty-Seventh 



Congress — a letter from the Secretary of War 
sent us on the 17lh of July, 18i)'2. It will be 
remembered that when the South was dis- 
covered to be on a war footing, and the vail was 
drawn aside which had partially concealed the 
most hideous political and military conspiracy 
of modern times, much haste and precipitation 
ensued in ordering munitions of war. Orders 
went by telegraph and by mail, and prices were 
judged of as best they might be from the facts 
before the authorities. Large orders went to 
the Messrs. Remington, and early in 1862 Mr. 
Lincoln and Mr. Stanton appointed a commis- 
sion, to look into orders and contracts for 
arms, at the head ofwhich was the present Judge 
Advocate General Holt. Robert Dale Owen, 
then of Indiana, was a member, and Major 
Hagner, major of ordnance, was an assistant 
of the commission. Here is its report, and I 
send to the Secretary, asking him to read the 
brief passages I have marked first from the 
testimony of Samuel Remington and then from 
the report. 

The Chief Clerk read from Mr. Remington's 
testimony, as follows: 

" Our house has been constantly engaged in the 
fabrication of arms and parts of arius_ for nearly 
forty years, and we now possess facilities for com- 
pleting every part of the rifle and revolver second 
only to one other private establishment in this coun- 
try, and we had expected such an increase of orders 
from the Government as would place us on a footing 
more nearly approaching equality with other private 
establishments. 

" Having business correspondence in all the prin- 
cipal cities of the South, we declined all orders for 
arms when there was the slightest ground to suspect 
the loyalty of the parties. As early as November, 
1860, we commenced returning orders from our south- 
ern customers, and we have not furnished anyone 
since who was known to sympathize with the rebel- 
lion. Jefferson Davis ordered five thousand rifles 
for the State of Mississippi in November, 1860, which 
was also peremptorily declined. In this we have only 
done our duty as loyal citizens. We claim no credit 
for performing our duty, nor do we wish to disparage 
others or make uncharitable comparisons; but jus- 
tice to ourselves requires us to state that we have 
furnished the Government with our Army and Navy 
revolvers at fifteen dollars, while it was compelled 
to pay twenty and twenty-five dollars for large quan- 
tities of a similar arm confessedly no better than 
our own; and in all our intercourse we have been 
governed in all respects by the usages and regula- 
tions of the service." 

The following extracts from the report of 
the commission were read : 

The commission find that the Messrs. Remington 
have been for a number of years manufacturers of 
arms for the Government; that they have a large 
and well-supplied factory for gun-work ; that, upon 
receipt of the above orders, they enlarged the capa- 
bility of their establishment by the expenditure of 
about one hundred thousand dollars ; that they are 
working zealously and at extra hours to expedite 
their work, and have now parts of all the five 
thousand pistols in hand. 

The work on the rifles is also fully under way, and 
parts of a large number are in hand. 

Mr. Remington has appeared before the commis- 
sion and stated that they desired to devote the full 
capabilities of their establishment to the use of the 
Government; that they found they could manufac- 
ture pistols and rifles with fair profit to themselves 
^ at much less prices, provided the Government would 
secure to them work for a reasonable time by giving 
orders for arms to the extent given to other first- 
class manufacturers; that if permitted to contract 



14 



with the Qovernment for the manufacture of forty 
thousand rifles additional, or forty thousand Spring- 
field muskets, they would agree to furnish the rifles 
with saber bnyonets at seventeen dollars each, or 
the S{>ringfield muskets at sixteen dollars each, and 
would then charge the above ten thousand rifles, if 
confirmed to them, at the rate of seventeen dollars 
only ; and, further, that in case their proposal, made 
in accordance with the advertisement of the ord- 
naitoe department, to furnish Army revolvers was 
accepted, they would likewise agree to include the 
number in the above order of July 30 as forming part 
of any number ordered, and at ttie rates stated in 
their proposal. Theoommission, accepting the above 
offer of Mr. Remington, postponed action on the 
above crbcs, and recommended the execution of 
oontracts for forty thousand Springfield muskets at 
sixteen dollars, and for twenty thousand Army and 
Nary revolvers at twelve dollars. 

Ab the said coulraets havo now been executed ac- 
cordingly ou the part of thr Government, they hereby 
confirm the above orders of July 30 fur ten thousand 
Harper's Ferry rifles and of July 30 for five thou- 
sand Army revolvers, according to all their tcrrns 
and conditions, provided that the price to be paid 
for each rifle shall be seventeen dollars, including 
appendages, and for each revolver twelve dollars, 
including appendages; and provided further, that 
they shall, witbin fifteen days after notice of this 
decision, execute bond, with good and sufficient 
sureties, in the form and with the stipulations pre- 
ecribed by law, and the regulations for the perform- 
ance of the contract, as thus modified, and, upon 
their failure or refusal to execute such bond, then 
the said orders shall be declared canceled and of no 
effect. 

We are, sir, very respectfully, your obedient ser- 
tuaCs, 

J. HOLT. 

ROBEKT DALE OWEN. 

Oommiisionern. 

J. V.HAGNER. 
Major of Ordnance, uasmtant to Commission. 
(General J. W. Ripley, Chief of Ordnance. 

Washington, June 20, 1862. 

DsAR Sir: In the report which wo will make to 
the Secretary of War in a few days we shall take oc- 
casion to mention the reduced price at which Spring- 
field muakets have been contracted to be manufac- 
tured, and think it would be only justice for us to 
state that the information on which our action, in 
insisting on this reduction as reasonable, has been 
based, came from yourself, llaveyou any objections 
to our reJerring to you in this connection by name? 
If you have, of course we will not do it. 

Please answer by return mail, and oblige, very 
rest^eotfully. 

J. IIOLT, Gommiesioner. 
Mi. S. Rbminotox, Ilion, New York. 

Ofkice of Remington's Armory, 
Ilion, Nkw York, June 25, 1862. 

Sir : We havo your favor of the 20th instant, ad- 
dressed to one Mr. S. Remington, and in reply havo 
to say that we have no objection to your using our 
name, as suggested in your report to the Secretary 
of War in connection with the manufacturing of the 
Springfield musket, &c. 

We are, very respectfullv, your obedient servants, 
E. REMINGTON & SONS. 
Hon. Joseph IIolt, Waehinyton, I). G. 

Mr. CONKLING. 'J'hese extracts establish 
two things : first, that Keraiiigton & Sons gave 
all their facilities and energies to the Govern- 
ment during the war, refusing and rejecting 
all offers, at whatever profit, coming from the 
rebels, or from the enemies of the United 
States ; second, that they volunteered to in- 
form the Government that tiie prices offered 
them were excessive, and iliat at lower prices 
they were willing to make, hecause they could 
make with a living profit, the arms required. 



I think Samuel Remington may stand for the 
present upon Uiat record. Jf he wrote the 
letter which is attribated to him, I am sorry 
for it ; but I repeat, I think he may stand for 
the present until some other snapper up of 
unconsidered trifles shall rummage his pockets 
for other papers. 

Dugaid Dalgetty boasted of his loyalty; he 
said he was'true to every Government as long 
as it was his interest to be so. I hope that 
this standard of loyalty will not be too high 
for any man who, having served as the spy of 
Louis Napoleon, is ready in turn to serve the 
French republic, or the sons of Louis Pliilippe. 
1 hope it will not be too high for those who are 
seeking to bespatter our Government with the 
mud ill which they are dredging for claims 
against American merchants and Americaa 
ciiizens. 

Shortly after the proclamation to which I 
have called attention, the ordnance depart- 
ment discovered that Mr. Remington had busi- 
ness relations with France, instantly trans- 
actions with him were arrested, and from that 
hour never was sale made by the United States 
to Remington ; but the Government did con- 
tinue the sale to other citizens of ordnance 
stores. Was this unlawful, was it immoral 
according to any code 7 Did the Franco-Prus- 
sian war make it an act of hostility to Prussia, 
for this Government to sell arras to our own 
citizens? Were France and Prussia alone 
arming? No, sir. The honorable Senator 
from Missouri has chosen to discuss this ques- 
tion as if the only market for arms sprang from 
the combat between these two nationalities. 
On ihe contrary, the allies of Prussia were 
arming, as well as Prussia's foes. The whole 
eastern hemisphere was arming. Russia was 
arming, Austria was arming, so was England, 
Egypt, and the Sultan of Turkey. Denmark 
was arming, Sweden was arming. South Amer- 
ica was arming. There were strifes for em- 
pires and strifes for seas. Russia had given 
notice that she would dissolve or rend her 
treaty Btipulations which limited the armament 
with which she might cruise in the Black sea, 
Spain was on a war footing, in her own penin- 
sula, and in the Island of Cuba. All Europe 
was to be etnbroiled. There was likely to be 
a riot of the nations. In every money-center, 
and commercial mart on earth, there was a 
market for arms. And we are told that at 
such a lime, in the midst of such events, our 
Government must suspend iis customary trade. 
Who says this? What publicist ever said it? 
In what tongue did he write? \n what library 
can his words be found? Sir, I deny it. There 
is no such principle of pubhc law, no such dic- 
tum. I challenge its production. 

Why pervert and cramp the case, by arguing 
as if the Rhine was the sole field lor which 
jirras were in demand? Remington himself 
sold arms to eight foreign Governments: t« 
Denmark, forty- two thousand stand of arms; 
1 Spain, for Cuba, seventy five thousand stand 



15 



of arms; Rome, ten thousand; Japan, three 
thousand ; South America, ten thousand ; Swe- 
den, thirty thousand ; Egypt, sixty thousand; 
and others, nearly lialf a million stand of" arms 
sold to foreign Governments within the last 
three or four years, not to "scare geese," not 
" to kill black birds." but to carry on the grim 
trade of death, to lift still higher the purple 
testament of bleeding war. Mr. President, 
humanity may sigh and sicken, Christianity 
may shudder at the thought ; but to talk about 
this being a breach of international law, is the 
very phantasy or hypocrisy of faded sentiment- 
ality, if it is not something worse. Prussia 
had her needle gun. On a hundred battle- 
6eld8 the world had seen the arms of America 
surpass all other implements of war; on a 
hundred battle-fields American artisans had 
proved their title to unequaled inventive genius. 
The needle-gun of Prussia alone, in the whole 
armory of the world, was entitled to compari 
son with the arms we made. Prussia had her 
needle-gun in numbers great enough. She 
therefore did not buy guns of us, although our 
ordnance stores did go in part, I am told, to 
Prussia; but she wanted no guns. I call the hon- 
orable Senator from Missouri as my witness to 
prove this fact. I quote him: 

"The Senator from Iowa called already our at- 
tention to certain proceedings which passed between 
the Prussian legation and the AVar Department. 
Ue said that the Prussian minister had requested 
the Secretary of War to suspend the sales of iirms 
for a little while, so that Prussian agents also might 
have an opportuniiy to bid. The Secretary of War 
having communicated to me the same statement at 
the time, or a short time after, I inquired of the 
PruBHian legation whether this was actually the 
ease." 

I pause to ask the attention of the Senator 
to that statement. A member of this body 
goes to the minister of war and asks for the 
statement of a fact touching a foreign Gov- 
ernment, the Secretary of War makes an 
explicit statement to the Senator upon his 
veracity ; and that Senator tells us that he 
then goes to a foreign legation, communicates 
what he has heard, and inquires whether the 
§tatement of the American Secretary of War be 
true or not ! Sir, we have heard much about 
official propriety ; we have been told many 
things becoming and decorous in public officers. 
I venture no comment on the passage I have 
read, but I reserve the right to reflect whether 
this is an example we should improve oar 
ways by following. 

The application the Senator made was a very 
safe one, however. He inquired of the Baron 
von Geroit, who was not only a truthful man, 
not only a Christian, not only a German to the 
core, and a watchful, zealous minister, but who 
was a frieud of America iu sunshine and in 
shade, and who carried with him from our 
shores not only a memory of the respect and 
affection in which he was held, but a thorough 
appreciation of the kindness, the' friendship, 
and the fellowship that Germany ever found in 
the Amoricaa Republic. 



The Senator continues : 

"The information I received was this: that in- 
deed they had requested the Secretary of War to 
suspend ihe sales ol arms for a certain time, but not 
with a view to buy for the use of the Prussian Gov- 
ernment, which hud arms enough" — 

So the Senator was informed by the official 
representative of that Government — 
" but in some way, by advancing money upon them, 
to prevent the sale of those arms to the French." 

Mr. SCHURZ. The Senator is aware that 
I think the day after I made those remarks, I 
corrected them to some extent. 

Mr. CONKLING. Will the Senator give 
me the correction now? 

Mr. SCHURZ. Certainly ; I have the Globe 
here. 

Mr. CONKLING. I do not wish to place 
the Senator in a false position ; far from it. 

Mr. CAMERON, (after a pause.) Has the 
Senator from New York concluded ? 

Mr. CONKLING. I am waiting on the 
Senator from Missouri, who wishes to make 
some correction. 

Mr. SCHURZ. I think the Senator from 
New York took part in that conversation 
which I had with the Senator from Indiana 
the next day after I made that speech. 

Mr. CON KLING. If there is any material 
error, cannot the Senator correct it as matter 
of fact now? 

Mr. SCHURZ. The correction I made was 
this: that an arms merchant from New York, 
having been advised of the sales going on here, 
had come here and made the suggestion him- 
self, not that the suggestion had proceeded 
from the Prussian legation. 

Mr. CONKLING. The honorable Senator 
corrects himself upon a point not material 
now. His point is not in question here. I 
am citing the Senator to prove two things : 
first, that Prussia had the opportunity to buy 
of our citizens as all other buyers bought, 
and second, that Prussia declined, or did not 
improve the opportunity, because she was 
already equipped ; in the Senator's language, 
that she had arms enough. That is all. 

Mr. SCHURZ. May I interrupt the Sen- 
ator for a moment there ? 

Mr. CONKLING. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SCHURZ. The Senator does not sup- 
pose I pretend to speak here as to the reasons 
which Prussia had for not buying arms. When 
I said that she had arms enough, that was my 
own supposition, nobody else's. 

Mr. CONKLING. Then the honorable 
Senator will allow me to say that he was un- 
fortunate in putting the statement into the 
mouth of Baron Geroit. Let me read what 
he said : 
" The information I received was this " — 

From the Prussian minister — 
" that indeed they had requested the Secretary of 
War to suspend the sales of arms for a certain lime, 
but not with a view to buv for the use of tho Prus- 
sian Government, which had arms enough, but m 
some way, by advancing money upon thorn, to pro- 
vent tho sale of those arma to the French." 



16 



Certainly if the honorable Senator meant to 
express a conjecture of his own, there was some 
infelicity in his putting it into the mouth of the 
German minister ; but of course I make no 
2)oint upon it if the Senator will only state 
what he means us to understand now as to the 
fact. 

Mr. SCHURZ. What I meant the Senator 
to understand was simply this, that that was 
parenthetically interjected as a remark of my 
own, for the Senator can very well understand 
that if Baron Gerolt had made a statement 
about the condition of his country to me in 
regard to such matters, I would not report it 
here. But that was one of the reasons which 
suggested itself very naturally, as we were all 
very well informed about the military condition 
that Germany was then in. 

Mr. CONKLING. Really the Senator pre- 
sents me now with apiece of propriety too fine- 
apun for my comprehension. My mind is not 
microscopic enough to perceive the propriety 
which he says restrains him. Let me under- 
stand it. He says now, a year after the war 
has ended, that he would not be guilty of 
stating what Baron Gerolt told him pending 
the war, touching the number of arms Prussia 
had. The Senator knows that there has gone 
into the military gazettes of Europe and of the 
world, a minute statement of all the armament 
of Prussia, from a gun-carriage to a canteen. 
What possible secrecy or confidence can there 
be at this late date about the armament or 
equipment of Prussia, or the report of that 
equipment made by Baron Von Gerolt? Con- 
sidering the Senator had no scruple in making 
known to the minister of Prussia the statement 
of the Secretary of War, and in comparing 
notes with the minister to know whether the 
Secretary of War told the truth, it seems to me 
it is very scrupulous in him now to shrink from 
telling what the minister said about matters 
which have already become notorious through- 
out the world. 

Mr. SCHURZ. I merely wanted to inform 
the Senator that in reporting the conversation 
I had with Baron Von Gerolt I desired to urge 
the principal point, and that the remark inter- 
jected there about the military condition of 
Prussia was a remark of my own. However, 
I do not consider the point relevant at all, nor 
«loes the Senator from New York, as I per- 
ceive. I think, therefore, it was hardly neces- 
sary to multiply so many words about it. 

Mr. CONKLING. What, then, is all this 
about? The Senator says now that Prussia's 
fall supply of arms was his own statement. 
Did he believe it when he made it? 

Mr. SCHURZ. That Prussia had arms 
enough? 

Mr. CONKLING. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SCHURZ. To be sure I did. 

Mr. CONKLING. Then I still call the 
Senator as my witness. We know how thor- 
oughly informed he is touching the politics 
and public affairs of Christendom. We know 



the access and facility he has to learn such a 
fact as he states, and therefore I call him to 
the witness-stand again to prove, not upon 
the testimony of Baron Von Gerolt, but upon 
his own testimony, that Prussia had the oppor- 
tunity to buy arms, but that she was armed 
and equipped, and did not want them. 

Mr. SCHURZ rose. 

Mr. CONKLING. But, sir, if the Senator 
will pardon me a moment, without calling 
him as a witness, I can prove the fact other- 
wise, inside this case, and outside of it by a 
cloud of witnesses ; and if the Senator is sen- 
sitive about being quoted in this regard I will 
establish the fact without his testimony. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Not at all. On the con- 
trary, if the Senator had put the question to 
me directly he might have had a very short 
answer: " Yes, I believe so ; there is no doubt 
of it." I did not want to put that remark into 
the mouth of Baron Gerolt; that was all. 
About the fact itself there cannot be the 
remotest doubt in the world. 

Mr. CONKLING. Very well. Then let 
me apply the fact, as I was proceeding to do 
when I was stopped by the Senator. The 
fact, then, is that all comers alike, whether 
from the Black sea, the Baltic, or the Mediter- 
ranean, whether in the eastern or the west- 
ern hemisphere, had the opportunity in open 
market to buy ordnance stores in American 
markets. That is the fact. What, then, be- 
comes of the pretense that we violated neu- 
trality? What becomes of the allegation that 
France was favored? What becomes of the 
assumption that the Franco-Prussian war mo- 
nopolized the arms market, and that we were 
bound to assume that all arms bought were 
destined for the single region occupied by that 
war? 

But the Senator has another complaint. It 
is said that Richardson — and now" I shall not 
forget to answer the question put to me about 
the mode of sale under the statute — " one 
Thomas Richardson, the known attorney of 
Messrs. Remington & Son," says the pream- 
ble, bought arms, and the Government of the 
United States is arraigned for selling to Rich- 
ardson? Why? 

Let me first remark that that statement in the 
preamble is shown twice over to be ground- 
less: first, because the allegation is that the 
papers referred to show that Richardson was 
the known attorney of RemiHgton & Sons, and 
those papers upon inspection show no such 
thing; second, the statement is false in fact, 
however bolstered up, that Richardson was 
"known" to the War Department as the 
attorney of Remington ; and that is the mean- 
ing of the preamble; that is the force of the 
word "known" as there used. Theallegation 
is not that he was so known to his family, or to 
Mr. Remington and to his family, or in the little 
hamlet where the Senator says Richardson 
lives ; but the charge is that Richardson was 
known to the War Department as the attoi* 



17 



ney of Remington ; and the honorable Sena- 
tor from Missouri appears as the advocate and 
champion of that allegation. How does he 
attempt to prove it? By circumstances, nay, by 
theory and conjecture — nothing more. He tells 
us that the Government was bound to inquire 
who Richardson was, and he tells us that 
Richardson was "a little lawyer;" "a little 
country lawyer," "a bellicose lawyer;" and 
then, with inimitable facetiousness, he asked 
the Senate, did Richardson want these guns 
to bombard the heads of judges in place of 
bombarding them with arguments? Did he 
want them to "scare away geese," or "fire at 
blackbirds?" That is ineffably funny; it is 
mirthful in a side-splitting degree; but I ask 
the honorable Senator, is it worthy a place in 
such an argument? 

No, sir, Richardson did not want these 
guns to scare away geese. He wanted them 
to sell in the market at a profit, as he would 
have sold so many barrels of flour or so many 
pounds of beef. He wanted them, as every 
other dealer wants a commodity, to make 
money upon them — that was his interest and 
object. Wheresoever a man's treasure is, 
there is his heart also. 

But the honorable Senator says the War 
Department should have known that he was a 
little country bellicose lawyer. Why so? It 
turned out in the course of the Senator's argu- 
ment that he knew enough of the mode of 
transacting such business to understand that 
men do not come with their bids upon their 
lips, and present themselves face to face at 
the Ordnance Bureau. Such business is done 
by mail, or by broker, and on paper, not by 
word of mouth, or in person. Therefore the 
Secretary of War had no opportunity to com- 
pare this man with greater men, and see how 
" little " he was, nor how liable to be spoken 
of by the Senator with such magnificent disdain. 

But the honorable Senator seems not to 
know the mode of transacting business at the 
War Department in the sale of stores. Does 
he know that every bid must be accompanied 
by twenty per cent, of the amount in cash ? 
Does he know that a margin of twenty per cent. 
in money,i8 put up at the time of the bid, and 
that the balance must all be paid before the 
storesare delivered, and paid within thirty days, 
on penalty of forfeiting the margin of twenty per 
cent.? Does the honorable Senator know it 
is a cash transaction — that the name of the 
buyer is cash ? If I might air a faded classic- 
ality, I would remind him that the Roman 
poet tells us there is no color in money, and 
when the little bellicose lawyer sends his 
twenty per cent, of legal tenders with his bid, 
and follows it with his eighty per cent, of pay- 
ment, his money is as good as if it were the 
money of the distinguished Senator himself. 

If the bid of Richardson came in the due 
course of business, and free from badge of sus- 
picion, it would, of course, be treated like other 
bids, and if it were the highest bid, it would be 



accepted. What can it be supposed there was 
to suggest French agency in one bid, more than 
in another, whether the bidder spelled his 
name Richardson, or spelled it otherwise? 
If the authorities suspected Richardson, they 
were bound, the Senator says, to inquire. If 
they had reason to know, or believe, or 
suspect him of being a French agent, 
then there was something to put them on 
inquiry. But this part of the case breaks 
down for the want of a leg to stand on; 
there was nothing to put the Department on 
inquiry, and the Secretary says there was no 
thought or suspicion that Richardson acted 
for France in any way. Is it pretended that 
Richardson's bid was in any respect peculiar, 
suspicious, or noticeable? Not that we have 
heard. 

But the Senator wants me to observe the 
requirement of the statute that notice shall 
be given. Does he know that notice was given 
in all these cases, and that every man who buys 
at private sale buys as a bidder upon a recorded 
bid? If he does know it (and he nods assent) 
I should like to understand the weight of his 
question upon the statute. He reads to me 
the statute to show that as he understands it 
notice must be given. I ask him if he knows 
that notice always was given, and he nods 
assent. What is it that the Senator would of 
me, then, in reference to the statute? 

Mr. SCHURZ. My assent did not refer to 
their always having given notice. I did not de- 
sire to express any such opinion. All I wanted 
of the Senator was merely to have his opinion 
whether the statute really meant that notice of 
a sale should be given thirty days beforehand 
in some public paper; and that is what he 
understands it to mean. 

Mr. CONKLING. No; I understand the 
Senator now to interpolate the words "in some- 
public paper." I had not heard that before. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Public notice being given. 

Mr. CONKLING. Yes, notice beinggiveti — 
nothing about newspapers, however. When we 
talk about a statute, it is well to talk about it, 
and not about something else, or something 
it does not say. I have heard nothing before 
about public papers, and I confess my ignor- 
ance of the usage of the Departments as to the 
particular mode or instrumentality of giving the 
notices to which they resort. If I had under- 
stood that the insertion in a newspaper was the 
topic of the Senator's inquiry, I would have 
pleaded ignorance at once. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Now I must confess that 
the answer of the Senator is a little unintel- 
ligible to me. Does he really interpret that 
statute in such a manner that in the usual way 
public notice is to be given of the sale of arms 
or ordnance stores thirty days beforehand? I 
ask that question in perfect good faith. 

Mr. CONKLING. I have no doubt of it, 
Mr. President, and I answer in like good 
faith. The statute speaks of notice, or of sale 
after notice of certain length of time, and I 



IS 



understand all these sales have been in fact 
npon and after such notice. If I am so dull 
as not to apprehend the Senator's question I 
beg his pardon ; I mean to apprehend it, and 
I mean to answer it. 

I have said that there seems to have been 
no reason to inquire into Richardson, or to pry 
into his circumstances or intentions. I want 
now to prove by the Senator that the War 
Department did not in fact know or suspect 
that Richardson was the agent of Remington, 
or the p^ent of France. How shall I prove 
it? By interviews held between the Senator 
and the Secretary of War at the time. Here 
is th« Senator's own narrative of these inter- 
views : 

"The answer I received " — 

That is, from the Secretary of War — 
"in eeveral of these interviews was that the Gov- 
ernment had a right to sell arms to American citi- 
aens; that he did not know that the arms went into 
the hands of French agents, and did not see any 
reason to stop the sales." 

If this statement is true, there is an end of 
Richardson upon the question of his being 
"known" to the War Department as the 
emissary of France or the agent of Reming- 
ton ; and I can prove by the Senator further 
that the statement is true, because he has 
been kind enough to support the veracity of 
the Secretary of War. He says : 

" Understand me well. I am by no means willing 
to oast any aspersion of that kind upon the Secre- 
tary of War. I have always esteemed him an 
honest man." 

I think the Secretary of War, with the 
indorsement of the Senator from Missouri, is 
witness enough to establish the fact that the 
War Department did not know or suspect that 
Richardson was the agent of France or the 
agent of Remington. The Secretary could 
not be truthful if Richardson was known as 
Remington's agent, because Remington had 
become known as the agent of France. What, 
then, is the truth of the whole matter? The 
Government went on with its sales, beginning 
long before the I'Vanco -Prussian war and con- 
tinuing long alterward. And here 1 quote 
from memory, not having lately looked — Sen- 
ators fresh from examination will correct me 
if I am wrong — the statement of Vattel to this 
efiFect, that under circumstances like these it 
is an unquestionable right of every Govern- 
ment to "continue its customary trade." I 
think I am not wrong in the phrase, and the 
honorable Senator from New Jersey, [Mr. 
FftELlNGiiUTSEN,] who hss, 1 think, recently 
reviewed Vattel, will correct me if i am wrong. 
The action of our Government, unchallenged 
by Bismarck, unchallenged by Prussia, un- 
challenged by the representative of Prussia, 
is gainsaid now, as 1 have a right to s-iy, and 
I invite a denial of the statement, with the 
full knowledge that claim agents of France rely 
upon it to bring out evidence wherewithal to 
pursue merchants in the city of New York. I 
repeat again, that I invite ueuial of the state- 



ment that this is one motive of this invectiga- ^ 
tion, and a motive not concealed from those i 
who bring it forward. I 

But, Mr. President, we are told that in trans- j 
actions of ten million dollars, Americans have 
made a profit of a million. What of it? I 
am glad of it. I would it were two millions ; I 
should not grieve if it were four. The French 
people were doomed to be beaten and stripped 
from the start, and if the profits they paid have 
gone into the workshops of America, and not 
into the workshops of Great Britain, amen, 
amen. The French people were no parties to 
the war. It was not their war. It was a sor- 
did dynastic plot and raid of Louis Napoleon. 
The sooner his money was gone, the sooner 
the agony was over ; the sooner the woful 
pageant was passed ; the sooner Alsace and 
Lorraine were lost ; the sooner a sorry theatrical 
clored with the words, " Not being permitted 
to die at the head of my army, I lay ray sword 
at the feet of your Majesty." Ask no grief 
from me, for the cause or the gold this gamester 
lost. His reign was a usurpation ; his Gov- 
ernment and his campaign were founded on a 
lie, ai.d a lie will upset anything, from an 
apple-cart to an empire. 

No, Mr. President, no investigation to enable 
Louis Napoleon, or his successor, or the claim 
agentsof France, to dog American merchants, 
or rummage their books and accounts to learn 
whether the sum be more or less they made 
from the profits of merchandise in the markets 
of the world. 

We are told again that French officials have 
been guilty of embezzlement. Well, justice 
seems to be overtaking them. Remington, 
overlooking apparently the ingratitude and the 
scandal of their attempting now to wrong him 
of his dues, has made valuable contribution to 
the information which has brought French cul- 
prits to justice. Let France punish her crim- 
inals ; let France pursue her remedies ; but do 
not let us soil the American name for effect in 
a presidential canvass, or to fish for evidence 
on which France or Frenchmen may harass 
manufacturers or traders in America. 

This case as it stands, is a case of collapse; 
but let it be investigated, and let us be quick, 
lest investigation turn to post mortem examin- 
ation. Let us investigate it on all sides. I 
have offered an amendment to enlarge the 
scope of inquiry, and as pertinent to that 
amendment 1 read an act of Congress to the 
Senate : 

" If any pcr?on being a citizen of the United States, 
whether lie bo actually resident or abiding within 
the United States, or in any foreign country, shall, 
without the pcniii.ssion or autliority of tlie Govern- 
ment of the United States, directly or iiuiiroctly 
coDimcnco or carry on any verbal or written corre- 
spondence or intercourse wit!i any foreign Govern- 
ment, or any ofliccr or agent thereof, with an intent 
to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign 
Oovcrnmont, or of any officer or agent thereof, "in 
relation to any dinputeg or controversies with the 
United States, or defeat the measures of the Govern- 
ment ot the United States; or if any person being a 
citizen of. or resident within the United States, and 



19 



not duly authorized, shall counsel, advise, aid, or 
assist in any such correspondence, with intent as 
aforeeaid, ho or they shall bo deemed guilty of a high 
misdemeanor, and on conviction before any court of 
the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall 
be punished by a fine not exceeding $5,000, and by 
impriaonment during a term not less than six months 
nor exceeding three years." 

That is a good statute. It was made for a 
purpose, and has long stood. It was signed 
by a Massachusetts President. I should like 
I to know whether it has been violated. That 
I correspondence and communication — I couple 
[the words of the statute — have been com- 
Imenced and carried on with a foreign Govern 
pent, or with the agents or officers thereof, is 
TOO clear for doubt. Whether this has been 
ione with the intent denounced in the statute, 
let us see. Let there be light on that point 
among others. It may be that he, a citizen 
of the United States, who, knowing that the 
Alabama controversy with England is pending, 
knowing that the San Juan boundary dispute 
is pending, knowing that Germany's emperor 
is an umpire in one of these disputes, know- 
ing that heads of other nations are members 
of the tribunals before which we are about to 
appear, it may be that he who knowing all 
this, upon groundless and unexplored pretexts, 
arraigne the conduct and the honor of his Gov- 
ernment before the world, charges it with a 
breach of neutral oblio'alions more odious and 
aggravated than those we lay at England's 
door, and who holds correspondence with 
French agents or officers lor this purpose, and 
thus provides himself with evidence by which 
to compass his object, is not caught in the 
embrace of the statute I have read. If so, 
it will do no harm to investigate, and let 
us know how the fact may be. Enough has 
cropped out to give occasion to the public to 
consider the case in the aspect presented 
by my amendment. 

The Senator from Missouri will take no of- 
fense I hope at my reading an extract from a 
German paper published at Chicago, known 
ae the Staats Zeitung. 

Mr. SCHUliZ. Yes, sir, and it is edited 
by the collector of internal revenue there. 
[Laughter.] 

Mr. CONKLING. He must be a very good 
collector of internal revenue. He is a very 
good collector of external information and 
external sense. Commend me to that man. 
You may depend he is a careful collector of 
the things which he deems it his business to 
gather up. I read, after the remark of the 
Senator, with leas hesitaiion than I had before, 
the comment ofthis German organ upon the 
proceeding which now occupies us. He says: 

"The German Government has never regarded 
this matter as a breach of neutrality. It bus never 
complained or protested; and to bo more German- 
ized than Bismarck we oertainly need not be. 

"On the other side, these speeches of Suvinkk and 
ScHUKZ, which are being made at the moment when 
the_ conference of Geneva is threatened with disso- 
lution, are so many nrms sent to England, to be 
used against the United States. Tlii.i may suit 
the Cologne newspaper, but ihat we should rejoioo 



thereat does not seem so clear to us. It seems to u« 
that in the German-American patriotism of Senator 
ScHURZ a curious transformation has occurred. 

"At the time when the Germans were protesting 
and indignant Senator Schukz was an American 
and remained silent. Now. on the eve of a conflict 
with England, when it is the duty of every Aiaeri- 
can, native or adopted, to be patriotic and public- 
spirited. Senator ScnuEZ is all at once a German." 

Mr. SCHURZ. Will the Senator from New 
York permit me to make a remark? 

Mr. CONKLING. Certainly. 

Mr. SCHURZ. The collector of internal 
revenue makes the remark that when life sale 
of arms was being carried on I was an Ameri- 
can and did nothing to respond to the explo- 
sion of feeling which then went on all over 
the country. The man lies, and he knows it, 
and there are other gentlemen on this floor 
who know it, and I appeal to my friend, the 
Senator from Indiana. [Mr. Morton.] 

Mr. SUMNER. I know it. [Laughter.] 

Mr. CONKLING. There appears to be a 
vast deal of information lying about loose. 
[Laughter.] This, in spots and places and 
at times, is the most intelligent body I know 
anything about. The only wonder is that 
some members who know so much on-.8ome 
subjects, should be so wanting in information 
on others ; but I am not surprised at this 
gush of information. My opinion is, and it 
does not rest on air, that members of this 
body do know much of the history, ^he rise 
and the progress, and they will no doubt yet 
know much of the decline and fall of the 
"arms scandal." Their knowledge goes back 
for months, and when they leap forward ii; 
their exuberance and wealth of information, J 
am not surprised. 

I did not read this extract from a Germac 
paper to convict the Senator from Missouri of 
having done or omitted to do anything. That 
was not my object. I read it to hold the 
mirror up to nature, to let the Senator seetho 
reflex of his sayings and doings, to let him see 
how it strikes intelligent men of all natioaal- 
ities and all shades of opinion. 

Mr. SCHURZ. May I say a word? 

Mr. CONKLING. Always. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Did not the Senator ratter 
prove to me how it strikes the minds of inter- 
nal revenue collectors? 

Mr. CONKLING. I did not know that I did ; 
but upon such disordered rules of evidence as 
seem to prevail with the Senator, I should think 
he mi{;ht come to such a conclusion. He has 
seen fit to speak of this editor as an internal 
revenue collector. I hope in so speaking, he 
has not subtracted anything essential from 
his next essay on civil service reform. I hope 
tills passage torn out, will not mar the beauty 
of the production. I hope enough materijil 
will be left to make that essay tremendous with 
stunning effects. Some oiher instance may be 
looked up, to show that if a man has been 
selected by the sentiment and intelligence 
around him as a proper person to hold a pub- 



20 



lie trust, he must be a scoundrel, and is to be 
discredited and branded. I understand the 
person now so roughly denounced, is a respect- 
able American citizen of German descent. If 
he has ever been guilty of peculation, theft, 
fraud, or dishonesty, I pause to enable the Sen- 
ator to state it. If he has not, if he stands 
fair and has acquitted himself honestly, per- 
sonally and otficialfy, I leave so much of satis- 
faction with the Senator as will remain with 
him for attempting to asperse an American 
citizen and a countryman of his own. 

Mr. SCHUiiZ. May I add one remark to 
the eloquent passage the Senator has just been 
delivering himself of? 

Mr. CONKLING. More than one. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Did 1 not tell the Senator 
that that editor, in stating what he does state 
there, states something which he knows to be 
false? 

Mr. CONKLING. I did not fail to hear 
the very torse and laconic statement made by 
the honorable Senator upon that point. I did 
not join issue with him in regard to it, for fear 
that my doing so might lead to discussion, 
possibly controversy. Whether, assuming the 
article to be false, the editor knew its falsity, 
is one question ; whether the article is false 



in general, is another question, and there the 
belief of the honorable Senator and mine might 
not coincide. 

I believe, Mr. President, this proceeding, 
this enormous accusation, and the publication 
of it to the world, witli a reckless want of care 
about its truth, is an act which can never be 
justified, and can be palliated only by refering it 
to prejudice and feeling too great to be resisted. 

Difiering widely as to the quality of the act 
of parading such accusations, the Senator and 
I had better not discuss the justice of the news- 
paper paragraph which has disturbed him so 
much. 

But let us have investigation on all sides. 
Let there be no dark place, no nook, no cor- 
ner anywhere. The American honor has been 
assailed; the American name has been hawked 
at ; grave and offensive charges have been 
spread before the world. Let us know the 
truth, no matter at what cost of convenience. 
Let the witnesses be brought, if to bring them 
it be necessary to traverse continents, visit 
islands, vex seas. Let us know the very right 
and justice of this matter. Let us have laid 
bare, the motives which have brought it about. 
Let justice be done, though officials higher or 
lower fall. 



LB S '12 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 789 108 6 



L 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 789 108 6 



pH8J 



